W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > October 2004

Re: [Fwd: RE: "information resource"]

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:05:40 +0200
Message-ID: <1903209480.20041015200540@w3.org>
To: "Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol)" <skw@hp.com>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org

On Friday, October 15, 2004, 12:10:37 PM, Bristol) wrote:

>> I'm arguing that the dog resource would in Patrick's 
>> definition be an IR because it has a body of information (its 
WSHLB>                                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
WSHLB> This is not Patricks defn!

>> medical records) but should not be an IR (per Basel def.).

WSHLB> Patricks defn is: "An "information resource" is a resource which
WSHLB> constitutes a body of information."

WSHLB> Deeper in his message [1] he says "Why not simply state that an
WSHLB> "information resource" *is*
WSHLB> information -- i.e. a body of information???"

WSHLB> I take him be using the word 'constitutes' in the sense of 'is'.

If it means "is" in the sense of "is solely" then its the same as the
basel definition.

 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 Member, W3C Technical Architecture Group
Received on Friday, 15 October 2004 18:05:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:06 UTC